1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The obligation of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 28, 2007, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 5,000,000 from the Defendant at a rate of 49% per annum and due date for repayment on December 27, 2007.

(hereinafter “the instant loan”). (b)

The Plaintiff paid each “payment amount” to the Defendant on the “payment date” of the attached Table for Appropriation of Performance.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul's evidence Nos. 1 to 9, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The parties’ assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s Defendant fully repaid the interest and principal of the instant loan (which is unreasonable to apply the annual interest rate of 30% or 25% per annum when the first instance court satisfied the Defendant’s performance, even though the statutory interest rate was 15% per annum).

(2) Defendant 2) The amount indicated in the “amount to be repaid” column of the attached Table of the judgment of the first instance out of the interest and principal of the instant loan from the Plaintiff is as indicated in the “amount to be repaid” column of the attached Table of the judgment of the first instance.

In accordance with Article 479(1) of the Civil Act, if the amount of the loan was repaid and the principal is appropriated in the order of interest and the principal, the principal of the loan will remain 3,800,063 won as of September 21, 2017, and 4,056,819 won as of September 21, 2017 (the defendant asserted that the interest and principal of the loan of this case were remaining as of the first instance court's purport of the counterclaim, but the appellate court asserted that the interest and principal of the loan of this case were equal to the amount recognized by the first instance court's judgment).

Judgment

1. We examine the principal and interest balance, and the fact that the Plaintiff paid each “payment” to the Defendant on the “date of repayment” as set out in the separate sheet for satisfaction of obligation as seen above. However, if the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not have any evidence to prove that they agreed to appropriate the said repayment to the principal of the loan to the principal of the loan, and if they have satisfied the repayment in the order of the principal in accordance with Article 479(1) of the Civil Act, the principal of the loan as of September 21, 2017 remains 3,79,004, interest amount of 3,953,875, as stated in the separate sheet for satisfaction of obligation.